Archive for November, 2013

Report on LENR from Swedish ELFORSK

Many thanks to Axel Westernius! I ran it through Google Translate and read through its main details. It is a long and detailed report. It mentions Rossi’s E Cat, Defkalion’s Hyperion and Brilloin Energy as the leading contenders. It mentions ECE in a fair way as a theory that shows the inadequacy of the standard physics and mentions UFT230. I am not sure that they understand that in UFT226 to UFT231 we explained LENR with quantum tunnelling without yet going beyond the Schroedinger equation. In the next stages of our theory we will use spin connection resonance, which as you know does not exist in the standard model. The latter has been refuted to the satisfaction of literally millions of readers, so is not useful in my opinion. All these ECE LENR papers and notes have been heavily studied and ALL are in Google Scholar. However the report mentions that no replication of LENR has been made. This is surely out dated by now because Toyota for example have replicated a Mitsubishi LENR device. There have been many several independent replications of LENR. Otherwise I would not have applied ECE to LENR. The report mentions that there are 1,700 refereed papers on LENR. The ECE papers are refereed by the readership. Obviously the readership (i.e. the colleagues) accept ECE papers in droves.

Subj: Report on LENR from Swedish ELFORSK

ECE is mentioned in note 6 on page 7.

Dear Myron et al,
ELFORSK ( has just released a report on LENR (attached). Unfortunately, there is only a summary in English. You may be able to get Google to do a reasonable translation of the full report. I will try to find out if a full English version is or will become available.

Kind regards,



Learning Cartan’s Geometry

I am very pleased to hear this, someone in a Department of Economics doing the learning work that standard physicists should be doing. There is a glossary of a kind in the attached book by Lar Felker. The first three chapters of Sean M Carroll are good too. Review papers UFT100 and UFT200 may also be useful as a guide, and also the ECE Engineering Model and some excellent work by the AIAS colleagues. A short glossary is given as follows.

1) The tetrad postulate is the requirement that the complete vector field be independent of the way in which it components and basis elements are described. This is very fundamental. In ECE theory all the wave equations of physics emerge from the tetrad postulate, including all of quantum mechanics minus the Heisenberg indeterminacy.
2) The first and second Cartan structure equations define the torsion and curvature respectively as vector and tensor valued two-forms of differential geometry:

T = D ^ q; R = D ^ omega

In ECE theory these define the relation between fields and potentials. They can be translated into the Riemannian torsion and curvature. The Riemann torsion and curvature are both given automatically and simultaneously by the action of the commutator of covariant derivatives on a vector or more generally a tensor of any kind and any rank in any dimension. If the Christoffel connection is symmetric both the curvature and torsion vanish because the commutator vanishes. So in order for the Cartan structure equations to produce a finite torsion and curvature, the Christoffel connection must be antisymmetric in its lower two indices. This inference refutes the entire twentieth century thought in general relativity. GENERAL RELATIVITY MUST INCLUDE FINITE TORSION.
3) The Cartan identity is

D ^ T := R ^ q = q ^ R

and in ECE theory defines half of the field equations of gravitation and electromagnetism. The Evans identity is:

D ^ T tilde := R tilde ^ q = q ^ R tilde

and defines the other half of the field equations in four dimensions. The Evans identity holds only in four dimensions, but the Cartan identity holds in any dimension.
4) Elie Cartan’s original geometry has been greatly developed in many directions by mathematicians, not least among whom was his son, Henri Cartan. Obviously they all accept the correctness of Cartan’s original geometry. This is so obvious that it hardly needs to be written down. Within its definitions, Cartan’s geometry is rigorously correct and self consistent. For example I have shown that in tensor notation the Cartan identity is exactly correct, one side is exactly the same as the other.

Many of the UFT papers show how the form notation is translated into tensor notation and then vector notation for engineers. Everything in ECE theory is based on Cartan geometry, whose correctness is very well known. I have broken out the proofs in all detail to help the readers and give much more detail than Sean Carroll, who himself gives an exceptional amount of detail. Any “attack” on Cartan geometry is total utter nonsense, as in the wikipedia article written by enemies of mine. I have no idea why this anomosity developed, that is their problem, not mine, or Cartan’s. Incidentally, in a letter to John B. Hart, Sean Carroll accepted ECE as a plausible theory. As for any theory, it must be tested against experimental data. Since it produces all the equations of physics (at least the correct ones), it has passed all its experimental tests so far. Curently I am making a whole series of new predictions of the fermion equation with Horst Eckardt.

In a message dated 29/11/2013 18:43:34 GMT Standard Time, writes:

Dear Myron. I agree you should encourage nascent students, and I especially agree with your comment on your current technical abilities. This is something I have noticed in myself, having been “forced” back through the differential and integral calculus and matrix algebra for my studies, and now enjoy and teach them at high levels. Regarding Cartan geometry, I have been reading your work for many years now, and convinced myself without great depth of understanding that your maths were right.

So, to deepen my understanding, I am learning Cartan-based differential geometry using a nice little (but rigorous) Dover book. And it is not difficult.

So, to the Colas Chabauds of the world, enforce the necessity of Cartan differential geometry. The only thing I feel I am missing at this point, so am committed to build, is a glossary of relevant operators and functions (unless I have missed that in all your work).

Very best,

Steve Bannister


Daily Report 29/11/13

There were 1,973 hits from 484 distinct visits, 31.3% spiders from baidu, google, MSN, yandex and seznam. Auto1 194, Auto2 66, Evans Equations (English) 115, Evans Equations (Spanish) numerous; Book of Scientometrics 81, CEFE 39, Autosonnets 11, Englynion 10 do date in November 2013. Argentine National Commission for Atomic Energy Bariloche Centre F3(Sp); University of Quebec Trois Rivieres general; Fraunhofer Institute for Nondestructive Testing Dresden UFT238-b; Karlsruhe Institute for Technology Steinbuch Centre for Computing (on edu) UFT157; University of Granada Essay 48(Sp); University of Poitiers general; University of Rome 3 levitron; Fowler Public Schools Michigan UFT papers; City of Novosibirsk UFT107; Physical Chemistry Royal Institute of Technology Sweden Essay 35, AIAS staff; National Chin Yi University of Technology Taiwan UFT107; Wadham College Oxford UFT88; School of Mathematics and Physics Queen’s University Belfast UFT57; University of Wales Swansea UFT85; Chemistry Warwick University UFT238b. Intense interest all sectors, updated usage file attached for November 2013.

Usage Statistics for

Summary Period: November 2013 – URL
Generated 30-Nov-2013 00:15 EST

253(8): Relativistic Corrections to ESR in the Operator Representation

These give the two resonance frequencies (21) and (22) which can be worked out for the hydrogenic orbitals by computer algebra. These are very interesting corrections to ESR and as far as I know, completely original to this work. They depend on the orbital being considered, unlike the original ESR resonance given by Eq. (20). As usual these notes just scratch the surface of what is possible, and use the simplest kind of theory.


Working Devices

Grenoble has a strong reputation and several of its institutes and universities have visited steve.bannister) . It is best to choose a device that has been replicated. The best contact for advising on devices in the design stage is Horst Eckardt, whose e mail address you have already. As AIAS President I would like to see exactly what you plan, one of the devices in design stage being built and tested. There are many devices on adn In teh past Alex Hill has demonstrated these to many people. One of the institutes at Grenoble could buy a Rossi LENR reactor or build one of their own under licence, and develop it. They could also replicate, build, develo pand market the Alex Hill devices if he agrees. This would involve the usual non disclosure agreements and so on. There may be funds available in Grenoble to invite Alex Hill and Aureliano Horta to Grenoble for device demonstrations. One of these took place in Zurich a few years ago and one of the major German cities, looking for investors I think. Are there any post graduate studentships for which you could apply? There are industrial sources of studentships and so on. In Munich the Bedini machine has been replicated. To give yourself maximum chance of success it is best to start with a replicated device, and to develop from there. On the website there are devices such as LCR resonant, infinite solenoid, levitron and so on. UFT107 has generated a huge amount of interest, with Franklin Amador, Horst Eckardt and myself.

In a message dated 29/11/2013 00:30:35 GMT Standard Time, writes:

I have a lot of profesors verry nice that I know in Grenoble-INP.
Thery are verry competent in the classical electric science and technology.

I haven’t talked about ECE nor Free Energy Phd by now, because I want to have a good subject, a bit prepared, to ask them.

I think they could agree. A good thing could be that I make a device that your team has already tested, that proves ECE or Free Energy is able to provide Ekectric Energy.

If I do this as premilary work, they should be interested.

So we can begin to build in Grenoble-INP one of your device (the simplest, even if it is not so efficient, juste to prove that something is possible)

From this point, we could help your team during my Phd to Build and test other devices that you may want to test but you haven’t do it yet?

It may be difficult to begin without any concrete proof.

But we never now, I will send to my professor I am in touch your website and I will see what he feels…

For Finencing, I mau now pesonnaly some companies which could help me, how much is the amount for a 2or3 years Phd? Do I required a lot and expensive materials for the experiments?

I keep you in touch.

Thank you all

Colas Chabaud

Daily Report 28/11/13

There were 1949 hits from 570 distinct visits, 27.6% spiders from baidu, google, MSN and yandex. Auto1 185, Auto2 65, Autosonnets 11, Evans Equations 115 (English), numerous (Spanish), Book of Scientometrics 81, CEFE 39, Englynion 10 to date in November 2013. Faculty of Engineering Sao Paulo State University Brazil F13(Sp); Department of Electronics Carleton University Canada LCR resonant; University of Toronto UFT123; University of the Frontier Temuco Chile UFT176(Sp); Federico Santa Maria Technical University Valparaiso Chile Space Energy; University of Antioquia Colombia UFT147(Sp); Ford Corporation LCR Resonant; Intel Campuses United States Simulation Circuit Resonance Parameters (Sp); Isreali Military general; Fraunhofer Institute for Electron Beam and Plasma Technology UFT238b-de; Students University of Kiel UFT237; University of Koeln (Cologne) UFT237, Proof 2, UFT2; Purdue University UFT142; University of Helsinki UFT18; University of Poitiers general; Trinity College Dublin UFT88; Italian Institute for Nuclear Research (INFN) Trieste UFT57; Mitsui-Kinzsoku Corporation levitron; Physics University of Utrecht UFT33; Silesian Data Center Poland Book of Scientometrics; Semiconductor Physics Group Physics Cambridge University UFT81; Eastleigh College Hampshire Spacetime Devices. Intense Interest all Sectors, updated usage file attached for November 2013.

Usage Statistics for

Summary Period: November 2013 – URL
Generated 29-Nov-2013 00:19 EST

Qualitative Description by Spin Connection Resonance

That SCR is a complete qualitative success is obvious from the fact that it describes the resonance peak observed by the Alex Hill group. I developed SCR theory following the experimental data. Similarly B(3) theory and ECE theory was developed following the data, the inverse Faraday effect. I suggest that the Alex Hill group in strict commercial confidence and among themselves deduce the connections needed to describe their confidential data qualitatively. In so doing the latest SCR theory should be used. It has been developed a lot by Horst Eckardt and Douglas Lindstrom. As a British Civil List scientist I suggest that irrational criticism of new energy be ignored completely by all scientists and engineers. This is what I have been doing for some years. It is quite obvious that the new industrial revolution is here to stay. It is pointless throwing insults at Arkwright for inventing a new industry based on the spinning jenny. Admittedly that led to Blake’s dark satanic mills, but LENR and new energy will lead to a bright clean future.